Wednesday, December 2: Tune It Or Die!
HELPLESSLY HOPING
by Rob Lopresti
Last week I received a disturbing letter from the Mystery Writers of America, and it wasn’t even about my dues.
Recently, Harlequin Enterprises launched two new business ventures aimed at aspiring writers, the Harlequin Horizons self-publishing program and the eHarlequin Manuscript Critique Service (aka "Learn to Write") both of which are widely promoted on its website and embedded in the manuscript submission guidelines for all of its imprints.
Canadian-based Harlequin is, of course, one of the leading producers of women’s fiction. Their webpage boasts of 115 books a month, and offers a seemingly endless variety of series, including supernatural, Christian, historical, and NASCAR romances, to name just a few.
So, why exactly is MWA upset about their new initiatives?
It is common for disreputable publishers to try to profit from aspiring writers by steering them to their own for-pay editorial, marketing and publishing services. The implication is that by paying for those services, the writer is more likely to see his manuscript to the publisher.
MWA wasn’t the only bunch to get cranky, either. The Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA) and – more importantly – the Romance Writers of America (RWA) weighed in. RWA’s big threat: was to remove Harlequin from their list of approved publishers, which would mean their books could not be nominated for the organization’s awards. Carol Thomas reported that Nora Roberts, one of the best-selling authors in the world of women’s fiction, wrote, while acknowledging a place for self-publishing: “it’s a different matter when a big brand publisher uses its name and its resources to sell this as dream fulfillment, advertises it as such while trying to claim it’s not really their brand being used to make money on mss they’ve rejected as not worthy of that brand in the first place.”
As of November 25, Harlequin Horizons has changed its name to DellArte Press. (Harlequin is, of course, a character in the form of drama known as commedia dell’arte.) As I write this, Learn To Write is still on the Harlequin page.
The score card
Let’s keep the categories straight:
Traditional Publishing: The publisher pays the author. The publisher owns the books.
Self-Publishing: The author pays the printer. The author owns the books.
Vanity (aka Subsidy) Publishing: The author pays the publisher. The publisher owns the books.
Self-publishing gets easier all the time. There are sites on the web to help you do it. Some bookstores have staff to help you set up the book and machines to print them. (Full disclosure; my wife works at such a store.)
There can be good reasons to self-publish:
Small audience. You’re writing your memoirs for your grandchildren or a history of your neighborhood.
Known audience. You run the foremost website on knitting covers for machine guns. Everyone who would want a book on that subject already reads your website, so advertising is a cinch. Why share the money with a publisher?
Desire. You want to see your work in print and no publisher wants it. Hey, it’s your money; knock yourself out.
But there is NO good reason for vanity publishing. This is delusion; buying the pretense of having a "real publisher" endorse your work. As near as I can tell, DellArte is offering a vanity deal.
Learning to Write
As for the pay-to-critique thing … Nothing wrong with hiring a writing teacher if that’s what you want. As MWA makes clear, the problem is if the customer gets the idea that this somehow increases their chances with the publisher who is flogging the service.
I remember reading years ago of a major agent whose agency offered a for-pay critiquing service. I always wondered how the agent explained it to his real authors. “I’m just ripping off the rubes and suckers. I wouldn’t treat you like that. You aren’t a rube or a sucker, are you?” If you were the author wouldn’t you head for the door, hand firmly on your wallet?
In the old Italian comedies Harlequin was an acrobatic clown whose personality changed depending on the needs of the show. In real life such shifts and gyrations can be dangerous for your health and reputation.
The best analysis and history I’ve seen can be found here on Jackie Kessler’s site:
Thanks to Toni Kelner, Tal, Lore, and others for pointing out Jackie’s site.
I remember being startled the first time I found out professors could vanity publish their textbooks under the McGraw-Hill imprint.
My heartfelt apologies to Nora Roberts for misspelling her name.
The Board of Mystery Writers of America voted unanimously on Wednesday to remove Harlequin and all of its imprints from our list of Approved Publishers, effective immediately. We did not take this action lightly. We did it because Harlequin remains in violation of our rules regarding the relationship between a traditional publisher and its various for-pay services.
What does this mean for current and future MWA members?
Any author who signs with Harlequin or any of its imprints from this date onward may not use their Harlequin books as the basis for active status membership nor will such books be eligible for Edgar® Award consideration. However books published by Harlequin under contracts signed before December 2, 2009 may still be the basis for Active Status membership and will still be eligible for Edgar® Award consideration (you may find the full text of the decision at the end of this bulletin).
Although Harlequin no longer offers its eHarlequin Critique Service and has changed the name of its pay-to-publish service, Harlequin still remains in violation of MWA rules regarding the relationship between a traditional publisher and its various for-pay services.
MWA does not object to Harlequin operating a pay-to-publish program or other for-pay services. The problem is HOW those pay-to-publish programs and other for-pay services are integrated into Harlequin’s traditional publishing business. MWA’s rules for publishers state:
“The publisher, within the past five years, may not have charged a fee to consider, read, submit, or comment on manuscripts; nor may the publisher, or any of the executives or editors under its employ, have offered authors self-publishing services, literary representation, paid editorial services, or paid promotional services.
If the publisher is affiliated with an entity that provides self-publishing, for-pay editorial services, or for-pay promotional services, the entities must be wholly separate and isolated from the publishing entity. They must not share employees, manuscripts, or authors or interact in any way. For example, the publishing entity must not refer authors to any of the for-pay entities nor give preferential treatment to manuscripts submitted that were edited, published, or promoted by the for-pay entity.
To avoid misleading authors, mentions and/or advertisements for the for-pay entities shall not be included with information on manuscript submission to the publishing company. Advertising by the publisher’s for-pay editorial, self-publishing or promotional services, whether affiliated with the publisher or not, must include a disclaimer that it is advertising and that use of those services offered by an affiliate of the publisher will not affect consideration of manuscripts submitted for publication.”
Harlequin’s Publisher and CEO Donna Hayes responded to our November 9 letter, and a follow up that we sent on November 30. In her response, which we have posted on the MWA website, Ms. Hayes states that Harlequin intends as standard practice to steer the authors that it rejects from its traditional publishing imprints to DellArte and its other affiliated, for-pay services. In addition, Harlequin mentions on the DellArte site that editors from its traditional publishing imprints will be monitoring DellArte titles for possible acquisition. It is this sort of integration that violates MWA rules.
MWA has a long-standing regard for the Harlequin publishing house and hopes that our continuing conversations will result in a change in their policies and the reinstatement of the Harlequin imprints to our approved list of publishers.
Frankie Y. Bailey,
Executive Vice President, MWA
MWA’s Official Decision: That because Harlequin’s for pay publishing business violates MWA’s rules for approved publishers, MWA takes the following action: First, Harlequin shall be removed from MWA’s list of approved publishers upon the adoption of this motion; Second, that all current active status members of MWA whose status is based upon books published by Harlequin shall remain active status members; Third, that MWA decline applications for active membership based upon books published by Harlequin pursuant to contracts entered into after the effective date of this motion; Fourth, that books published by Harlequin pursuant to contracts entered into prior to the adoption of this motion shall be eligible for the Edgar® Awards, except that books published by DellArte Press shall not be eligible for the Edgar® Awards regardless of when such contract was entered into; and Fifth that books published by Harlequin pursuant to contracts entered into after the adoption of this motion shall not be eligible for the Edgar® Awards.
MWA’s Executive Vice-President, and her or his designates, are directed to continue discussions with Harlequin in an effort to reach an agreement that would allow for Harlequin to be an approved publisher according to MWA’s rules.
Lee Goldberg is a member of the National Board of MWA. He’s best known as a television writer and author of TV mystery tie-in novels, most recently the “Monk” books. He’s also the co-founder, along with Max Allan Collins, of IAMTW, the International Association of Media Tie-In Writers. His blog, “A Writer’s Life”, is one of the best on the internet.
Lee and MWA EVP Frankie Bailey are both friends of mine.
This posting reproduces an MWA mass mailing, but it contains important news and I thank Lee for putting it up.